ArticleCritical care explorations2026
Vasopressor Use Among Adults With Sepsis in Uganda and Rwanda: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Critical care explorations, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAfrica has the highest global sepsis burden. Yet, sepsis treatment guidelines, including those for vasopressor use, incorporate data from high-income settings. We aimed to determine patterns of vasopressor use among adults admitted to hospital with sepsis in East Africa.
designRetrospective cohort study.
settingOne hospital in Uganda and two hospitals in Rwanda. PATIENTS: Adults admitted to hospital with sepsis, defined as suspected infection and greater than or equal to 2 quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria.
interventionsNone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsWe performed an analysis of pooled data from two retrospective studies of adults with sepsis admitted to hospital in Rwanda or Uganda. Of 471 septic patients analyzed, 263 (57%) were female, the median (interquartile) age was 51 years (36-65), 121 (26%) were living with HIV, 113 (24%) received a vasopressor, and death occurred in 139 patients (30%). In the univariable logistic regression analysis, higher respiratory rate and Universal Vital Assessment (UVA) scores; lower blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and Glasgow Coma Scale score at the time of sepsis diagnosis; presence of abdominal infection; and receiving a greater volume of IV fluids predicted receipt of a vasopressor. In the multivariable analysis, higher UVA mortality risk scores (adjusted odds ratio 1.25; 95% CI, 1.14-1.27; p < 0.001) predicted vasopressor receipt. We replicated these findings in exploratory machine learning analyses.
conclusionsIn patients with sepsis in East Africa, UVA score and hospitalization in Uganda were predictive of vasopressor administration. Further research is required to address existing knowledge gaps in the role, timing, and indications for vasopressors in sepsis management in Africa.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.